Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T05:32:09.086Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The use of hexoestrol for beef production from zebu cattle under ranch conditions in Tanganyika

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

H. G. Hutchison  and
J. M. Robb
H. G. Hutchison
Affiliation:
Veterinary Research Station, Mpwapwa, Tanganyika
J. M. Robb
Affiliation:
Veterinary Research Station, Mpwapwa, Tanganyika
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

1. Three groups of twenty, 3½ to 4-year-old zebu steers, replicated four times in each quarter of the year, were used to examine the effects of 30 and 45 mg. hexoestrol implants on their beef production, under ranch conditions in Tanganyika.

2. Significant advantages in mean live-weight gains of 20·8–47·3 lb. for 30 mg., and 9·8–47·3 lb. for 45 mg., were obtained when treated at any time of the year; but during the dry-season implantation is contra-indicated as initial response is adverse although followed by pronounced recovery when pasture conditions improve.

3. There was no significant difference between dosage rates in growth response, but on smaller steers, and as the pasture deteriorated, 45 mg. showed signs of being excessive.

4. Duration of significant response was about 3 months during the period of adequate grazing, but was delayed to 5 months, and probably longer, during the dry season.

5. Steers were slaughtered 6–9 months after implantation and at that time showed: no significant difference in dressing percentage, shrinkage in store, proportion of bone, or carcass grade; there was significantly less fat, and more lean, but increased proportion of moisture in the muscle accounted for the extra proportion of lean in the sample joints.

Treated carcasses were significantly longer by 1·0% and highly significantly larger in circumference of hind quarter by 2·0%.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 59 , Issue 3 , November 1962 , pp. 327 - 341
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1962

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Acker, D., Whiteman, J. V., Morris, E., Leverton, R., MacVicar, R. & Pope, L. S. (1959). J. Anim. Sci. 18, 1255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aitken, J. N. & Crichton, J. A. (1956). Brit. J. Nutr. 10, 220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andrews, F. N., Beeson, W. M. & Johnson, F. D. (1956). J. Anim. Sci. 15, 685.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartlett, S., Folley, S. J., Rowland, S. J., Curnow, D. H. & Simpson, S. A. (1948). Nature, Lond., 162, 845.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bassett, E. G. & White, E. P. (1955). N.Z. J. Sci. Tech. 36 (Sect. A), 485.Google Scholar
Bruce, W. (1960). The Kenya Farmer, 11 1960, p. 24.Google Scholar
Burgess, T. D. & Lamming, G. E. (1960). Anim. Prod. 2, 93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burns, M. A. & Sutherland, D. N. (1960). Qd J. Agric. Sci. 17, 39.Google Scholar
Burroughs, W., Culbertson, C. C., Kastelic, J., Cheng, E., Hale, W. H. & Homeyer, P. H. (1955). J. Anim. Sci. 14, 1015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Callow, E. H. & Finney, D. J. (1959). J. Agric. Sci. 53, 404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clegg, M. T. & Cole, H. H. (1954). J. Anim. Sci. 13, 108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deans, R. J., Van Arsdill, W. J., Reineke, E. P. & Bratzler, L. J. (1956). J. Anim. Sci. 15, 1020.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dodsworth, T. L. (1957). Agric. Rev. 2, 23.Google Scholar
Dohan, F. C., Richardson, E. M., Stribley, R. C. & Gyorgy, P. (1951). J. Amer. Vet. Med. Ass. 118.Google Scholar
Drain, J. J. (1957). Anim. Breed. Abstr. 27, 31, Abstr. 89.Google Scholar
Good, D. L. (1957). Anim. Breed. Abstr. 26, 137, Abstr. 640.Google Scholar
Jordan, R. M. (1953). J. Anim. Sci. 12, 670.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kenya Agricultural Department (1957). Rep. Dep. Agric. Kenya, 1, 21.Google Scholar
Klosterman, E. W., Cahill, V. R., Kunkle, L. E. & Moxon, A. L. (1955). J. Anim. Sci. 14, 1050 (Soc. Proc.).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lamming, G. E., Stokes, R. M. & Horspool, D. (1960). Anim. Prod. 2, 197.Google Scholar
Ledger, H. P. & Hutchison, H. G. (1962). J. Agric. Sci. 58, 81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Mary, C. C., Warren, E. P., Davis, T. J. & Pierce, H. H. (1956). J. Anim. Sci. 15, 52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pieterse, P. J. S. & Andrews, F. N. (1956). J. Anim. Sci. 15, 25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Preston, T. R. & Gee, I. (1957). Nature, Lond., 179, 247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Preston, T. R., Greenhalgh, I. & Macleod, N. A. (1960). Anim. Prod. 2, 11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quinn, L. R., Mott, G. O. & Bischotf, W. B. (1960). J. Anim. Sci. 19, 1312 (Soc. Proc).Google Scholar
Smith, R. G. C. (1958). Agric. Rev. 3, 29.Google Scholar
Sutherland, D. N. (1959). Qd Agric. J. 85, 727.Google Scholar
Tulloch, N. M. (1959). Anim. Breed. Abstr. 28, 119, Abstr. 541.Google Scholar